Mass exodus or not, Labour’s quarrels have been resolved – long before our media’s sensationalist coverage

What — did you think Jezza and the rest of the Labour Party refused to talk before this morning?

Having foreseen the move to suggest his party would fold beneath him, Jeremy Corbyn, of course, made a plan.

How shallow of our media to continue to suggest that the shadow ministers “dropping like flies” bore any genuine weight on the sustained strength of the Labour Party.

Regardless of Chuka’s absence, or Tristram’s career-defining flash of blue undergarments, who cares who rules themselves out for a Corbyn shadow cabinet? It is of sustained confusion to me how anyone could think this harms the leader himself?

Surely the public don’t wish to be patronised enough to suggest these human beings, in a working environment, don’t engage in a little conversation from time to time? Perhaps, instead, it is presumed that Labour politicians avoid each other – instead of, you know, planning for the possible eventuality of election.

Tristram, clearly, hasn’t been given a place in the starting XI, and it’s not hard to see why. The Education Secretary’s views couldn’t be more dissimilar’s from Corbyn’s. Regardless of whether or not Jamie Reed -the unknown frontbencher who resigned moments after Corbyn’s election – is a politician of high enough calibre to be remembered by Bruiser, his resignation is a kicking-and-screaming from the proverbial shadow cabinet pram.

Whether it’s a Labour based on Methodism or Marixsm, we still have a Labour led by a democratic leader, elected by new and old members alike. A Labour Party for 2015 is, absolutely, necessary – regardless of the age of the ideals.

Why must what was bad for the goose 40 years ago necessarily be bad for the gander today?